Sunday, August 06, 2017

Britain, Brexit and the Spirit of Dunkirk

For the past two weeks "Dunkirk" has been top of the box office in
cinemas throughout the United Kingdom. The film is a fictional rendition
of the evacuation of the British Expeditionary Force from the Dunkirk,
in France, in May 1940, as Hitler's invading divisions blitzed their way
towards Paris.
The evacuation involved over 400,000 soldiers, including many
Frenchmen and troops recruited in British Empire and Commonwealth units
such as Canada and Australia.
The greatest retreat in the history of warfare, the Dunkirk operation
prevented the Germans from annihilating the bulk of the British army,
giving London the chance to prepare to fight another day.

French
and British soldiers, who were evacuated from Dunkirk, on board ships
berthing at Dover, England on May 31, 1940. (Image source: Imperial War
Museum/Wikimedia Commons)

At first glance, there was little heroism in such a vast force
fleeing without fighting; armies usually retreat after they have fought
and lost a battle. And, yet, what came to be known as "the spirit of
Dunkirk" was truly heroic as thousands of ordinary Brits, defying
Hitler's vast war machine, made their way to the beaches of Dunkirk,
often aboard small fishing boats and dinghies and even a few floating
bath-tubs, to help bring the stranded soldiers back to England.
Over the following decades "the spirit of Dunkirk" came to indicate a
key characteristic of the British: fighting when their backs are to the
wall.
Not surprisingly, therefore, those who campaigned for Britain leaving
the European Union last year have seized on the excitement created by
the new film to inject a bit of heroism in their narrative.
"Yes," they say," Britain is heading for tough times outside the
European Union. But, helped by the Spirit of Dunkirk, it shall overcome
all hurdles."
One leading campaigner for "Brexit" has even demanded that the new
film be shown in schools to boost the morale of the young whose lives
will be most affected by leaving the EU.
However, it is hard to draw a parallel between Brexit and Dunkirk, if
only because the EU can't be equated with Nazi Germany. Nor was the UK
at war with the EU, an alliance of democratic nations which Britain
played a leading role in the creation of its latest version.
The question the Brits faced in Dunkirk was one of life and death. As
a member of the EU, however, Britain has enjoyed membership in the
biggest economic bloc in the world, alongside most of its NATO allies.
Advocates of Brexit have cited four reasons why the UK should leave.
The first is "regaining lost national sovereignty".
However, in its White Paper published earlier this year, the
government solemnly declared that Britain never lost sovereignty.
Membership of the EU meant a sharing of -- and not a loss of --
sovereignty. Britain already shares sovereignty in many international
and regional organizations including NATO, the United Nations, the
Commonwealth, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank,
among many others.
If sharing sovereignty is equated with its loss, the UK should
withdraw from more than 120 organizations, something that even "fully
sovereign" North Korea hasn't done.
In any case, EU membership involves sharing sovereignty on a limited
number of issues linked to commerce, industrial standards, agriculture
and working conditions. It does not even extend to such matters as
taxation and interest rates, let alone issues of national security,
defense and foreign policies.
The fact that Britain can leave the EU or any other international
organ of which it is a member shows that shared sovereignty does not
mean loss of sovereignty. The claim of loss of sovereignty is bogus.
The second reason cited by Brexiteers, with the catch-phrase "control of borders," is equally bogus.
Anyone entering the UK knows that he must show a passport or identity
card and be formally admitted into the country. EU citizens have the
right to enter the territory of any member state without a visa to
visit, look for a job, study or simply reside.
But under the 2007 Treaty of Lisbon, they cannot stay beyond a
three-month limit unless they can prove they have a job, are in
full-time education or have independent means of support.
Member states can, and in many cases do, expel those EU citizens who
do not fulfill any of the stated conditions. In other words, all
members, including the UK, already have the right and the power to
decide how many EU citizens they wish to host.
The third bogus claim is about "rule by unelected officials in Brussels."
However, the Council of Ministers is the EU's main decision-making
and legislative body, and is composed of ministers from member states,
all of whom are democratically elected.
It forms the union's legislative body together with the European
Parliament which is also directly elected by voters in all member
states. When it comes to the so-called "Brussels bureaucracy," it is
necessary to remember that it is composed of individuals appointed by
elected governments of member states, in the same way that civil
servants are appointed in each country, with clear patterns of
accountability.
There is nothing that the "Brussels bureaucracy" can do without the
approval of the governments of member states and their parliaments.
The final reason cited by Brexiteers is the claim that the UK,
outside the EU, would be better able to make trade deals with "the rest
of the world."
However, the UK is already trading with over 190 countries, many of
which have full or partial trade deals with the EU, deals that the UK
has played a key role in shaping. It is not because of EU membership
that the UK exports to the United States half as much as Germany does.
The reason is that Germans produce goods that Americans want to buy
and the Brits don't, because the UK has specialized in service
industries at the expense of manufacturing. Being in or out of the EU
need not alter that fact.
In other words, there are no objective reasons to necessitate
Britain's exit from the EU, whereas the Dunkirk retreat was an
inescapable necessity.
However, when it comes to Brexit, it would be foolish to ignore the non-objective, emotional, factors.
Many Brits feel there are too many foreigners in their country and
blame EU citizens for declining standards in their National Health
Service, a shortage of affordable housing, pressure on schools and even
traffic jams.
Dunkirk was about running away, only to return. Will Brexit repeat that?